hey students, how should admissions clerks look at gpa, sat, etc??

when getting into a mediocre college, some admissions officers will look at the entire high school gpa of a prospective student knowing that this method of determining gpa will give the student the highest number

but more rigorous colleges will look at the harder last two years and make determinations on that and if a student can pull off great grades in junior and senior year, then they deserve acceptance

and of course, only the better schools can prepare a student for the SAT so the private schools definitely have the edge on making its students score higher on the SAT...some poor regions' public schools like to spike their scores by only admitting the highest scores to the state (since they are allowed to do that and call it the "average" SAT score)

for college graduates getting into graduate school, the confusion is taken out of the mix and the hardest possible criteria is made for determining acceptance...there is no one test you have to master to get in like the SAT so it's mostly determined on gpa...and only of the harder classes of the last 60 units of college taken and that tends to weed out more than half of college grads for graduate school

and the bar is lifted highest for getting into phd school/program which only looks at performance in a master's program (most of the time unless it's a professional program like MD, DDS, JD, PsyD, PharmD, DO, DBA, DPA, etc), and then the student has to achieve a 3.5 minimum grad school gpa...on the undergrad level, getting a 3.5 gets you on the dean's list and graduating with a 3.5 makes you graduate with honors...in a high school or 4 year college, you can get an A, B, C, D, or F but in grad school, the harder ones, there are three grades...A, B, and "take the expensive class over, you idiot"

this is the system in america as i have seen it and on every level of education, especially the high school level, there has been a huge amount of criticism of the system

did you know the only thing that the SAT has been shown to predict well is FIRST QUARTER college grades? After that, the SAT appears to have no correlation whatsoever to success in college. Are you sure it should be weighted more heavily? Furthermore the SAT is not an objective test. If you want, I'll go into why it is an unfair test in greater detail. But right now I have to go to class.

Originally posted by cddonline did you know the only thing that the SAT has been shown to predict well is FIRST QUARTER college grades? After that, the SAT appears to have no correlation whatsoever to success in college. Are you sure it should be weighted more heavily? Furthermore the SAT is not an objective test. If you want, I'll go into why it is an unfair test in greater detail. But right now I have to go to class.

Click to expand...

then make a new test.

i am not saying the SAT is a great test. i took it, but my ACT scores were the only ones looked at by schools. besides, what does a GPA tell you. Many of my friends from small towns were Valedictorians, and would not have been even close at my HS, not to mention not have had 4.0 gpas.

Some schools expect more for a grade then others. This is why I think a GPA means little.

I've noticed that too idkew. My school (a college-prep school) required a 3.5 to get on the honor roll, and a 4.0 for "excelsior" honors. My local high school required a 3.0. Also, starting my senior year, they stopped sending, or even listing, our class rank to colleges, because "it was misleading". Made sense to me, and it still does, because the top ten in the class were covere by less than .1 (4.6 -> 4.5xx I think it was). I'm just glad I don't have to take the SAT again, not with that essay writing. just glad I got 1280 the first time around...

I think GPA should be emphasized less. In my case, I have a 4.0 in all AP classes, but I share my #1 class rank with people who take very easy courses such as 'Floral Design' etc. While I'm not against their course selection, I don't think that such classes are preparing them for college, especially when those people are competing with me to get into the same colleges.

I also think that personal interviews should be emphasized more, and I'm glad colleges are starting to do that. Sure, a transcript and grade report can tell you everything about a person on paper, but what about the intangibles an individual brings to a college? Without an interview or on campus visit, how are admissions officers going to find out about the variety of one's personality. I have a Harvard alumni interview this Friday and a Dartmouth alumni interview next Friday. I think such interviews allow the colleges to see how you are as a person, not as a grade.

I also agree with the other posters when they mention the difference between the courses offered at the different high schools. How can people compare state standards with each other in an attempt to enter a semi-national educational system? The colleges are looking throughout the United States at prospective students, which invariabely leads to issues as each school stresses different academic areas. The A.P. system is a step in the right direction as it is a voluntary national standardized curriculem that admissions officers can compare between students.

Actually, I just needed to be in the top 10% of my graduating class to get into any public university in my state, which is what I did...

I'm not sure if they still counted SAT's or what, but I only applied to one school, and got in easily.

I personally don't find college hard. If you just study, read, and do the work, then you should be fine for the first few years. It's actually quite boring. I can't wait to get into my upper division classes where I'll actually have to think... I'm not saying I'm a genius or that I'm super smart. I'm just saying that these days, it seems that almost anyone can, or should be able to cut in in a basic 4 year degree program at a public university, or even a community college. And if you can't cut it, there are still plenty of things for a person to do... Too many people think higher education is for everyone, and although to me it seems like anyone who applies themselves can do it, there are too many people who can't because they're lazy, or just don't have any motivation. And then they complain, but that's another story for another day...

I think that stricter admission policies are needed. Although I probably wouldn't have gotten into my university, it would've also weeded out a lot of the idiots. Also, if I knew the admissions were stricter, I would've also tried harder in high school... It needs to be stressed, do well in high school, and I mean really good, then go to college, and get a respectable job, or you can just pick up garbage and flip burgers...

Originally posted by G4scott Actually, I just needed to be in the top 10% of my graduating class to get into any public university in my state, which is what I did...

I'm not sure if they still counted SAT's or what, but I only applied to one school, and got in easily.

I personally don't find college hard. If you just study, read, and do the work, then you should be fine for the first few years. It's actually quite boring. I can't wait to get into my upper division classes where I'll actually have to think... I'm not saying I'm a genius or that I'm super smart. I'm just saying that these days, it seems that almost anyone can, or should be able to cut in in a basic 4 year degree program at a public university, or even a community college. And if you can't cut it, there are still plenty of things for a person to do... Too many people think higher education is for everyone, and although to me it seems like anyone who applies themselves can do it, there are too many people who can't because they're lazy, or just don't have any motivation. And then they complain, but that's another story for another day...

I think that stricter admission policies are needed. Although I probably wouldn't have gotten into my university, it would've also weeded out a lot of the idiots. Also, if I knew the admissions were stricter, I would've also tried harder in high school... It needs to be stressed, do well in high school, and I mean really good, then go to college, and get a respectable job, or you can just pick up garbage and flip burgers...

Click to expand...

your second half of college will stress critical thinking and not just tactician skills and memorization

some people do better in the second half, but for most, it's harder and requires honest study

grad school requires orginal research and intense amounts of study and research and you will have to be able to express your point of view eloquently as well as the opposing viewpoints with equal conviction

The reason that colleges have a standards at all for admissions, is they want there recruiting dollars well spent. They spend money to get students to go to their school and there is only so much room. And everyone knows that the dropout rate is very high. So if they can recruit a student that will go there for four years, that is money in the bank for the college. If they get a guy that only hangs out for a year, then they still make money but not has much as the 4 year student. Everyone can afford a college degree ( harder for the middle class) but few can make it till graduation. And it isn't because the classes are hard, they just don't make it to all the classes. I know at one of the state colleges in my area, 75% of the freshman class don't graduate there. Of course some move, or complete somewhere else, but most dropout. So with that in mind, an interview process would be good, drug testing, as well as a resume from previous jobs even in highschool. Prove to the college that you will be there for four years at least. And for the people that think drug testing is an invasion of your privacy, drugs are illegal, so unless you are a criminal you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

Originally posted by zapp The reason that colleges have a standards at all for admissions, is they want there recruiting dollars well spent. They spend money to get students to go to their school and there is only so much room. And everyone knows that the dropout rate is very high. So if they can recruit a student that will go there for four years, that is money in the bank for the college. If they get a guy that only hangs out for a year, then they still make money but not has much as the 4 year student. Everyone can afford a college degree ( harder for the middle class) but few can make it till graduation. And it isn't because the classes are hard, they just don't make it to all the classes. I know at one of the state colleges in my area, 75% of the freshman class don't graduate there. Of course some move, or complete somewhere else, but most dropout. So with that in mind, an interview process would be good, drug testing, as well as a resume from previous jobs even in highschool. Prove to the college that you will be there for four years at least. And for the people that think drug testing is an invasion of your privacy, drugs are illegal, so unless you are a criminal you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

Click to expand...

there are so many extra criteria that one can add to make the process more accurate, but probably the best indicator would be age...if american college students entered their freshman year at 20 like some countires, then the graduation rate would be much higher and it would likely prove a better indicator than a resume or drug testing

Originally posted by jefhatfield for college graduates getting into graduate school, the confusion is taken out of the mix and the hardest possible criteria is made for determining acceptance...there is no one test you have to master to get in like the SAT so it's mostly determined on gpa...

and the bar is lifted highest for getting into phd school/program which only looks at performance in a master's program

Click to expand...

Just to correct some common misconceptions, there is a test for graduate school, it's called the GRE. It has a very similar format to the SAT with harder vocab and generally easier math, and an added logic section. It's required in many programs and a large number of schools.

Also, the bar isn't necessarily lifted for a Ph.D. in the way you think. They are certainly more rigorous programs than a Master's, but often, no Master's degree is required. This is true for a number of fields. As the number of qualified applicants has increased, the competition has intensified, and schools have been taking more and more doctoral students straight out of undergrad. Kind of like pro sports teams recruiting star players straight from high school.

First off, I'll say that the current system is flawed. But, I think the reality is that the system is not designed to make sure every "good person" gets into a good school. There are all sorts of hidden geniuses bored by high school out there. But to identify them while not increasing the risk of taking in more bad students is impossible, or at least beyond the resources of most schools.

A school can do a fine job of filling their classes with smart people if they just take a numerical cut-off for GPA and SAT, and then pay a small office to read a few paragraphs from each person to find the obvious gems that don't pass those (violin prodigies, published poets, children of rich alumni, etc). For huge schools, to expect more is somewhat crazy. Little schools can put more of an effort, since each placement is a little more valuable.

The good news is, if you think you are smarter or deserve better, there is room for upward mobility. You can transfer from your community college or state school to a fancy one. And if you are interested in a higher degree, then you can get into a good graduate program if you've excelled at college. And you can get into a good post-doctoral position if you excelled at grad school.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.